CHAPTER FIVE
Pathways to prevention There is often a close relationship between disasters and conflict. Conflicts undermine the capacity and commitment of states to prevent and respond to natural disasters and humanitarian crises. At the same time, disasters themselves can create unstable economic conditions, exacerbate social fault lines and heighten social exclusion – creating fertile ground for disputes. Reducing disaster-related risks can sometimes open paths for conflict prevention and more peaceful societies.
The United Nations Secretary-General has made the prevention of conflicts and crises a cross-pillar priority in the repositioning of the United Nations development system to deliver on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (Box 5‑1). The focus is on areas of the world where there is a convergence between violent conflict, humanitarian crises and the impacts of disasters and climate change.
The extent of conflict risk can be gauged from the OECD States of Fragility Framework. Based on political, economic, social, environmental and security criteria, this framework identifies 56 fragile states, of which 11 are ESCAP members.2 Of these countries, ESCAP designates eight as Countries with Special Needs (CSNs) that have priority for technical cooperation and capacity building support – Afghanistan, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Timor-Leste, Cambodia and Tajikistan. Given the close interlinkages between sustainable development, disasters and conflict-prevention, the CSN category of countries should now be expanded to include other aspects of fragility such as environmental risk and conflict prevention to effectively address disaster resilience.3
In recent years, most conflicts in Asia and the Pacific have been within states. The region has around 15 potential areas of inter-state conflict, but the conflicts that cost the most lives have been within states.1 Figure 5‑1 maps the occurrence of such conflicts for the period 1991–2015.
90